Ex-Anglican communities to become Catholic, Rome confirms

[rien]

It was good enough for the Apostles… both married and celibate men made deacons, priests, bishops, and even patriarchs.

There is no scriptural prohibition on married men in the clergy.

There is a longstanding disciplinary restriction on married bishops (ca 300 or so), and starting in about 600, continence by roman priests, and later celibacy.

This is good. Fr. Groeschel - no modernist - started his Sunday Live show on 07/27 with a reference to an early Christian quote that it is good bishops (forget priests) be married. As in he openly acknowledged what anyone who is “deep into history” will find if they read history. Not only were early Christian priests married, but also many early century bishops.

This is a discipline and not a doctrine. The Orthodox are closer to the historic early Church than the Catholics in retaining a universal married priesthood, but even they have strayed from the early church in denying married bishops.

Read history or listen to Fr. Groeschel’s show today. I don’t think anyone will accuse him of making this stuff up.

 

[Chellow]

Trying to get off the subject of married priests, what if the Vatican accepted an Anglican Rite Church, with its own discipline and order, which, at the highest level, their Primate, recognized the authority of the Pope?

This would look like the Maronite churches or the Greek Melkite-Eastern catholic Churches, with married priests, their own liturgy and property rules.

It would seem this would encourage more churches to be “united not absorbed” with Rome.

I for one will welcome an Anglican Rite Church.

 

[Grace_Angel]

Thank you for spelling that out a little more clearly. So it appears you don’t consider several of the Apostles, and countless married priests of Western and Eastern Churches to be authentic members of the priesthood. Fair enough, I can respect that.

The concept that a priest should mirror Jesus in some respects is one that nearly everyone would agree with. But your declaration that a priest must mirror Jesus in all aspects of life is much bolder, and more interesting.

First, are there levels of authenticity? Does a priest whose life more closely mirrors that of Jesus possess more authenticity, or is it black and white; you’re either authentic or not?

Next, I’m curious about where you draw the line. Clearly a priest can’t duplicate every action and event in the life of Jesus. Tying back into this thread, could the national origin of the priest impact this? - an English Christian’s upbringing doesn’t mirror that of a Palestinian Jew very well. I think Jesus is believed to have generally been itinerant - that speaks well of a jet-setter like John Paul, but must a priest mirror that, or can one who never travels also be an authentic member of the priesthood?

I could ramble on with similar examples, but for now that probably illustrates the holes in my understanding of your approach.

What a lot of crock you speak. the priest doesnt have to eat the same breakfast as Jesus ate. The british priest doesnt have to wear the clothing Jesus wore. the british priest doesnt have to speak with a plum in the mouth either but the british priest as with other priests have to act in the manner of Jesus Christ in his mediation for and on behalf of his “family” and his “bride” the church and its people.
GraceAngel.

 

[dabecca0105]

Well The Issue Of Married Priest Is Not An Issue For The Simple Fact That The Eastern Rite Has Always Had Married Priest. It Is The Roman Rite That Does Not Allow It. The Roman Rite Being The Largest Rite Of The Catholic Church Is The Most Known Rite. I Went To College With A Friend Whose Father Was A Priest.
Celibacy As Explained Is Taking A Vow Not To Get Married And That Means If You Have A Married Deacon And His Wife Dies He Can’t Get Married Again.

 

[rayne89]

Well The Issue Of Married Priest Is Not An Issue For The Simple Fact That The Eastern Rite Has Always Had Married Priest. It Is The Roman Rite That Does Not Allow It. The Roman Rite Being The Largest Rite Of The Catholic Church Is The Most Known Rite. I Went To College With A Friend Whose Father Was A Priest.
Celibacy As Explained Is Taking A Vow Not To Get Married And That Means If You Have A Married Deacon And His Wife Dies He Can’t Get Married Again.

Why are you capitalizing every word in each sentence? It doesn’t make for very easy reading.

 

[Evangel]

What a lot of crock you speak.

you are scratching the bottom of the barrel

inane/pedant ideas of priesthood which are being discussed or bandied about

Perhaps you don’t realize the anger that comes across in your posts. Just a heads up. Ad hominems are a no-no.

In any event, any Anglican ministers that become Catholic priests will not affect the priesthood negatively to any measurable degree. This will not be the beginning of the end of the Latin rite priesthood. Latin Rite priests cannot rightly object to the celibacy of their rite. They knew the rules going in. Only a tiny group are agitating for change. And they self-destruct in many ways.

 

[Grace_Angel]

Perhaps you don’t realize the anger that comes across in your posts. Just a heads up. Ad hominems are a no-no.

In any event, any Anglican ministers that become Catholic priests will not affect the priesthood negatively to any measurable degree. This will not be the beginning of the end of the Latin rite priesthood. Latin Rite priests cannot rightly object to the celibacy of their rite. They knew the rules going in. Only a tiny group are agitating for change. And they self-destruct in many ways.

So we are now permitted to be upset or “get angry”? at some of the idiocies bandied about? The worst sin today appears to be “judging” we are not allowed to be angry, upset or judge. All else is possible. All else can be challenged including the Holiness of God and priesthood, however, should one be upset or judge, then heaven forbid.
GraceAngel.

 

[Layman]

Beware of archeoligism i.e. ancient = better.

Just because it was done in the early years of the Church doesn’t mean it’s automatically good. Or appropriate for now. Never mind that we’ve also had 2000 years of saintly revelation and advice since then.

Celibacy is a sacrifice. By such sacrifices I believe God stays his hand against the human race.

 

[JW10631]

GraceAngel, your notion of the celibate priesthood would not go over well in Ukraine. The Ukranian Greek Catholic church ordains married men to the Catholic priesthood.

Bishop John Botean of the Romanian Byzantine Catholic Church, based in Canton, Ohio, has ordained married men to the Catholic priesthood.

It has been a part of the tradition of the Eastern Churches to have a married parish priest for many, many centuries. These married priests are no less priests than the celibate Latin Catholic priests.

I do not want to see the discipline of the celibate priesthood in the Latin Church change. Having said that, I accept the provision to allow, on a case by case basis, the ordination of married former Episcopal/Anglican/Lutheran clergy to the Catholic priesthood.

 

[catharina]

It’s been close to half a millenium since Henry VIII created his church. Now many are coming back to Rome. What can we say, other than “REJOICE!” So glad I lived to see this day …

 

[rjs1]

As an ex-Anglican I am looking forward to the return of traditional Anglicans to the Catholic Church. I believe they will bring with them a beautiful liturgy and special spirituality.

I believe that those of the Anglican clergy who are married will bring some special gifts to their priestly ministry and will make fine priests.

However, I firmly believe that the norm for the Catholic priesthood should be celibacy and that Our Lod Himself said in the Gospels, as St Paul did in his letters, that celibacy, for the Lord’s sake, is a higher calling. This is the official teahing of the Church.

 

[colliric]

Trying to get off the subject of married priests, what if the Vatican accepted an Anglican Rite Church, with its own discipline and order, which, at the highest level, their Primate, recognized the authority of the Pope?

This would look like the Maronite churches or the Greek Melkite-Eastern catholic Churches, with married priests, their own liturgy and property rules.

It would seem this would encourage more churches to be “united not absorbed” with Rome.

I do not believe this would be so because the Anglican Church does not have a Primate, as we know it, at it’s head but an Arch- Bishop leads it instead. It would probally become part of the Latin Rite because of the simularities of the “Mass” service to the Catholic Mass, but like the Charismatic Catholic Renewal will be allowed to use it’s language for the prayers and Gloria(which are I believe the only two major diffrences) and will surely retain a sense of it’s own identity within the Church. Anglo-Catholic would probally be encouraged to be used more than it’s short form of “Anglican” to describe this new group of catholics.

If their “primate” which is the Arch-bishop of Canterbury(Originally a position setup by the Catholic Church), recognised Rome they would have figure out some way of reincorperating his Arch-Bishopric under the London Archdiocese of Catholic Church of England. I think this is actually the major obsticle here and not the reintergration priests, which some others believe is the obsticle(because of Celebacy).

I doubt this will happen, but you never know with God.

 

[Grace_Angel]

GraceAngel, your notion of the celibate priesthood would not go over well in Ukraine. The Ukranian Greek Catholic church ordains married men to the Catholic priesthood.

Bishop John Botean of the Romanian Byzantine Catholic Church, based in Canton, Ohio, has ordained married men to the Catholic priesthood.

It has been a part of the tradition of the Eastern Churches to have a married parish priest for many, many centuries. These married priests are no less priests than the celibate Latin Catholic priests.

I do not want to see the discipline of the celibate priesthood in the Latin Church change. Having said that, I accept the provision to allow, on a case by case basis, the ordination of married former Episcopal/Anglican/Lutheran clergy to the Catholic priesthood.

JW10631: it seems that my notion of celibate priesthood would not go over well in Ukraine but it also does not go over well in USA/Aust/UK/Europe. So its not a local issue but a universal issue.
Priesthood according to the order of Melchizedek and in the manner/order/style of Jesus Christ is what I believe in. But thats me.
GraceAngel

 

[piperspop]

I do not believe this would be so because the Anglican Church does not have a Primate, as we know it, at it’s head but an Arch- Bishop leads it instead. It would probally become part of the Latin Rite because of the simularities of the “Mass” service to the Catholic Mass, but like the Charismatic Catholic Renewal will be allowed to use it’s language for the prayers and Gloria(which are I believe the only two major diffrences) and will surely retain a sense of it’s own identity within the Church. Anglo-Catholic would probally be encouraged to be used more than it’s short form of “Anglican” to describe this new group of catholics.

If their “primate” which is the Arch-bishop of Canterbury(Originally a position setup by the Catholic Church), recognised Rome they would have figure out some way of reincorperating his Arch-Bishopric under the London Archdiocese of Catholic Church of England. I think this is actually the major obsticle here and not the reintergration priests, which some others believe is the obsticle(because of Celebacy).

I doubt this will happen, but you never know with God.

We need to be talking about the same thing.

I am specifically talking about the request of the Traditional Anglican Communion for Corporate Unity with Rome.
We HAVE a Primate, Archbishop Hepworth.
We have NO affiliation whatsoever with Canterbury or the Episcopal Church. We have 400,000 members worldwide.
This is really a bigger test for Rome than for the TAC. If Rome seeks unity, it should be willing to go the route described by Pope Paul VI, “united but not absorbed”. We represent a traditional, conservative voice of Anglican Catholicism, a voice which can bring much to the table, especially in the USA.
Let me assure you that “Tiber-swimming” is NOT an option for us, as our disciplines, traditions and ethos are important to us, and, we feel, worth preserving. We trust that the Vatican, as expressed in a recent letter from Cardinal Levada to our Primate, is taking our request for Corporate Unity seriously.

“That they may all be one”

 

[rien]

We need to be talking about the same thing.

I am specifically talking about the request of the Traditional Anglican Communion for Corporate Unity with Rome.
We HAVE a Primate, Archbishop Hepworth.
We have NO affiliation whatsoever with Canterbury or the Episcopal Church. We have 400,000 members worldwide.
This is really a bigger test for Rome than for the TAC. If Rome seeks unity, it should be willing to go the route described by Pope Paul VI, “united but not absorbed”. We represent a traditional, conservative voice of Anglican Catholicism, a voice which can bring much to the table, especially in the USA.
Let me assure you that “Tiber-swimming” is NOT an option for us, as our disciplines, traditions and ethos are important to us, and, we feel, worth preserving. We trust that the Vatican, as expressed in a recent letter from Cardinal Levada to our Primate, is taking our request for Corporate Unity seriously.

“That they may all be one”

Good point. The ball is in Rome’s court now.

I am not so sure Rome, or many higher-ups, want a relatively big influx of orthodox beleivers.

England is a perfect example. JP2 specifically excluded the Pasotral provision from England? Why? When that might have been its most fruitiful country. It has certainly floundered in the US - for several reasons but that is another topic.

Oddie I beleive his name is was on Grodi’s show from the Bropmton Oratory several months back. An Anglican convert he mentioned he wrote a book (The Roman Option - not sure of the title) and at the time mentioned 2 parishes in England that had come into the Catholic church back at the time. A possible model for England. Within a month of his book coming out he said the parishes were closed.

To be frank, I do not think Rome will accomodate the TAC. Too many, IMO, at the top don’t want your kind of Chritian so to speak.

I’ve said for a while I think your best option is going the Orthodox route. It has its own complications but the Orthodox don’t have this sort of civil war going on in their church that the Catholic church seems to have going on in it.

 

[CatholicNerd]

I’ve said for a while I think your best option is going the Orthodox route. It has its own complications but the Orthodox don’t have this sort of civil war going on in their church that the Catholic church seems to have going on in it.

Yeah, right.

 

[anon52328184]

as someone who just joined the Roman Catholic Church in July after leaving the episcopal/anglican communion, i can only pray that many of these communities will come home to be in communion with the Holy See. i am happy that i made the decision to come home. there was too much pain watching what was happening and it doesn’t seem like the lambeth conference has changed anything. i think it would be beautiful to have them be received, but i also feel they will need to study what it is to be Catholic also. i studied one on one with someone from the church for about 8 weeks before i was confirmed.

 

[colliric]

We need to be talking about the same thing.

I am specifically talking about the request of the Traditional Anglican Communion for Corporate Unity with Rome.
We HAVE a Primate, Archbishop Hepworth.
We have NO affiliation whatsoever with Canterbury or the Episcopal Church. We have 400,000 members worldwide.
This is really a bigger test for Rome than for the TAC. If Rome seeks unity, it should be willing to go the route described by Pope Paul VI, “united but not absorbed”. We represent a traditional, conservative voice of Anglican Catholicism, a voice which can bring much to the table, especially in the USA.
Let me assure you that “Tiber-swimming” is NOT an option for us, as our disciplines, traditions and ethos are important to us, and, we feel, worth preserving. We trust that the Vatican, as expressed in a recent letter from Cardinal Levada to our Primate, is taking our request for Corporate Unity seriously.

“That they may all be one”

oh ok, I’m not 100% knowledgable about the anglican communion outside of the COE.

 

[rjs1]

I’ve said for a while I think your best option is going the Orthodox route. It has its own complications but the Orthodox don’t have this sort of civil war going on in their church that the Catholic church seems to have going on in it.

You have GOT to be kidding!!!

As an ex-Anglican who once considered the Orthodox Church I discovered they are the most divided, ethnically based conglomeration you can possible imagine. Each Orthodox Church is very ethnically based and you will find they do not reach out to others as far as seeking conversions.

In fact in the city of Adelaide in Australia, the publicly visible and known Greek Orthodox Churches were disowned by the real Greek Orthodox who said they were controlled by some heretical dissident group.

I once got into a discussion with an Orthox priest about divorce. He admitted the Bible condemned it and then said that the Orthodox only allow a person to divorce up to 3 times! Ask the Orthodox their view on artificial contraception and you will find they have no objection to it. However even worse, the Orthodox have got an appallingly bad record as far as NOT joining Right to Life anti-abortion groups. If you press them hard they really do allow abortion “in certain circumstances”.

Jesus founded one Church and that under the leadership of Peter. The Orthodox are most certainly not the answer the Traditional Anglicans need.

 

[SFD]

Well lookie here! It looks like that horribly, awful ecumenism worked again.

Except Anglican orders are invalid. Null and void according to the Church via the pronouncment of Pope Leo XIII.

papalencyclicals.net/Leo13/l13curae.htm

36. Wherefore, strictly adhering, in this matter, to the decrees of the pontiffs, our predecessors, and confirming them most fully, and, as it were, renewing them by our authority, of our own initiative and certain knowledge, we pronounce and declare that ordinations carried out according to the Anglican rite have been, and are, absolutely null and utterly void.

SFD